Categories
Uncategorized

Week 1 – The Case for Recruitment & Selection

Organizations might sometimes decide to allocate their resources for marketing or product design rather than employee recruitment. Companies think that by investing in other department will create more benefit for them since results can be proven through innovations and revenues. Companies might also create goals that might not include employees and therefore will be overlooked. However, they are the reason that the products can be made. In terms of marketing, companies might want to focus their attention on building a name for the brand and company. They view it as a key for competitive advantage that will attract their customers. Through marketing, it also helps determine the demand from the customers. While companies also think that product design as more important than employee recruitment since without a product, there won’t be sales. The only advantage of not prioritizing recruitment and selection is having more resources to be used in other departments. However, by prioritizing it will gain more advantage for the company. Making a key mistake will result to high cost in the hiring process since it will be repeated if a wrong employee gets hired. Hiring a bad employee will also lead to opportunity cost where the company projects will not be completed and time consuming for the company. Therefore, hiring a bad employee results in very high cost. Good employees are rare and hard to find. They are also recognized to create competitive advantage with competitors. Having a successful workforce is difficult to imitate while having a brand name is easier to get through marketing.

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

4 replies on “Week 1 – The Case for Recruitment & Selection”

Can you elaborate on your statement “Companies might also create goals that might not include employees and therefore will be overlooked”? I cannot think of any goals that do not include employees at some level.

You mention some advantages and disadvantages to not focusing on staffing. All of that being said, would you suggest a company place staffing as more important than R&D/marketing or as an afterthought?

Kenneth,
I agree that companies might decide to allocate its resources to things like product development rather than employee recruitment. It is easy for companies to want to focus on areas that will provide benefit right away and that will increase customer satisfaction. Thanks for sharing!

Hello,
You made several points which really stood out to me and seemed helpful in helping to understand this week’s materials. When you said that a bad employee has an opportunity lost cost, that seemed to me like the best way to put that. It is not just the resources lost in hiring, but the work that that employee could have done if they had been a good fit. So there is the actual cost loss and also the potential cost loss.
Second, the competitive aspect was also an interesting point. Having a strong company gives that company an advantage in its market, and makes it easier for the company to invest money in recruitment and selection. The company will have a better reputation, and people will want to work for them. This makes them more competitive because they will get better candidates.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *